Cases 51 - 60 of 117
Clayland Farm Enterprises, LLC v. Talbot County, Maryland et al
as 1:2014cv03412
Plaintiff:
Clayland Farm Enterprises, LLC
Defendant:
Talbot County, Maryland , Talbot County Planning & Zoning Commission , Talbot County Department of Public Works Advisory Board and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Gerald v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2014cv03286
Petitioner:
Ronald Gerald
Respondent:
John Wolfe and Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
John Williams v. K. Stewart
as 14-7179
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN WILLIAMS
Defendant - Appellee:
K. STEWART, Hearing Officer, JOHN WOLFE, Warden and GARY MAYNARD, Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services
Doyle Ham, Jr. v. Department of Public Safety
as 14-1779
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DOYLE R. HAM, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, DAYENA CORCOREN, JOHN WOLFE and others
Ralph Wilkins v. John Wolfe
as 14-6847
Petitioner - Appellant:
RALPH EDWARD WILKINS
Respondent - Appellee:
JOHN WOLFE, Warden
Hernandez v. Vale et al
as 8:2014cv01562
Plaintiff:
Melvin Hernandez
Defendant:
Patricia Vale, John Wolfe, Cherie Peay and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilkins v. Wolfe
as 8:2014cv01353
Petitioner:
Ralph Edward Wilkins
Respondent:
John Wolfe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Frederick Moore v. Warden John Wolfe
as 14-6270
Petitioner - Appellant:
FREDERICK JAMES MOORE
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN JOHN WOLFE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Taylor v. Wolfe et al
as 1:2014cv00464
Petitioner:
Eric S. Taylor
Respondent:
John Wolfe and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Aurel v. Jefferson et al
as 1:2014cv00352
Plaintiff:
Mich Aurel
Defendant:
Eric Jefferson, Allen K. Gang, Ford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
